NPTU_Industry_Forum_Slides.pdf

NAVFAC SOUTHEAST

Naval Facilities Engineering Command Southeast Industry Forum

December 3, 2013 Naval Air Station Jacksonville

Jacksonville, Florida

The NAVFAC Mission/Vision

Our Mission

NAVFAC is the Systems Command that delivers and maintains quality, sustainable facilities, acquires and manages capabilities for the Navy’s expeditionary combat forces, provides contingency engineering response, and enables energy security and environmental stewardship.

Our Vision

We strengthen Navy and Marine Corps readiness through our work across the facility lifecycle and our support of the shore expeditionary mission.

NAVFAC Atlantic

FY 13 ~$9.2B Volume of Business! – Approximately 19,000 people

NAVFAC SW

OICC MCI-West 10 PWDs 9 ROICCs

NAVFAC NW

3 PWDs

NAVFAC MW

4 PWDs

NAVFAC WASH

NAVFAC ML

OICC MCI-East

5 PWDs 2 ROICCs

11 PWDs 1 ROICCs

NAVFAC SE

15 PWDs 5 ROICCs

NAVFAC EURAFSWA

5 PWDs 5 ROICCs

NAVFAC Atlantic 7 FECs 55 PWDs 2 OICCs 23 ROICCs

CAPT Kiwus Commanding Officer NAVFAC Southeast

Fort Worth

Corpus Christi

Kingsville

Barksdale

Meridian

New Orleans

Gulfport Keesler

Pensacola

Whiting Field Panama City

Albany

Orlando

Key West

NAVFAC SE AOR

Shaw

Charleston

Beaufort

Kings Bay

Mayport

Jacksonville

Cape Canaveral

Guantanamo Bay

Haiti

Blount Island

NAVFAC SE Organization

IPT South Atlantic IPT Gulf Coast IPT South Central

• NS Mayport • NAS Corpus Christi • NAS JRB Fort Worth

• NS Guantanamo Bay • NAS Kingsville • NAS JRB New Orleans

• NSA Orlando • NAS Meridian • ROICC Barksdale

• NSB Kings Bay • NAS Pensacola • ROICC Albany

• NAS Key West • NAS Whiting Field • ROICC Charleston

• NAS Jacksonville • NSA Panama City • ROICC Beaufort

• ROICC Haiti • NCBC Gulfport

• SOUTHCOM/Caribbean AOR

• Capital Improvements • Environmental

• Public Works • Asset Management

• Acquisition, Financial Management, CIO, Counsel

• Contingency Engineering

Why are we here today?

Provide a brief overview of NAVFAC SE and NPTU Provide a brief overview of our business processes in regards to Safety Answer your questions regarding Safety Provide a brief overview of the project and draft solicitation Answer your questions about the projects and solicitation Create an open dialogue Obtain feedback on what we can do better and faster

Agenda

Introduction 0815 - 0830 NPTU Overview 0830 - 0900 Break 0900 - 0915 Safety discussion 0915 - 0945 Safety Q&A Session

P-100/P-099 Project Specific Brief 0945 - 1030 Project Q&A Session

Break 1030 - 1045 Solicitation Brief 1045 - 1130 Solicitation Q&A Session

Contractor Courtesy Information for Projects P100/P099

Nuclear Power Training Unit (NPTU)

12/3/2013

NPTU Overview

•NPTU Team Members

–NAVSEA 08

–NPTU Charleston

–NAVFAC SE

–JB Charleston –Burns & McDonnell

–SPAWAR

–NEXCOM

•NPTU Program –Provide prospective Naval nuclear propulsion plant operators and officers with training and certification in the actual operation of a nuclear propulsion plant.

NPTU Location

NPTU Location and Security

•NPTU Location and Security –Located on JB Charleston along Cooper River

• Environmental considerations –Hurricane potential –Seismic conditions –Blast arc –Dam upstream

–Security Requirements

• Access considerations

–Typical access for JB Charleston –Additional security requirements for access to NPTU secured perimeter

»Workers inside secured perimeter must be US Citizens »Escorts are required at all times within secured perimeter »No cell phones, thumb drives, cameras, etc within secured perimeter

Current Site Configuration

NPTU Overview

•P100/P099 Overview –Currently one main building, two piers and a finger pier with multiple barges on site

–24/7 Operations and Training, before, during and after construction –Construction Deadlines

• Installation of simulator in high bay of TSB-2 begins, October 1, 2016

• New training platform arrives at pier extension, April 1, 2018

–End of FY18

• NY Training site loses one training platform

• Half of program students from NY come to Charleston

–End of FY19

• NY Training site loses second training platform

• All students at Charleston

NAVFAC Southeast Safety Program

Presented By:

Dale J. Powell, CSP, CHST, CFPS

NAVFAC SE Safety Director

Topic Discussions

•Areas of Significant Emphasis for SE Safety:

•Safety Communication Tools (WORM, ORM Tip Sheets, Program Fact Sheet, Metrics)

•NAVFAC SE Sub-Contractor Safety Provision (Pilot Program)

•NAVFAC’s Use of ORM (Operational Risk management)

•Near Miss Reporting

•EM-385

Communication Tools

Near Miss Notice

WORM

•NAVFAC SE has instituted a Weekly Operational Risk Management (WORM) assessment into our mishap prevention program. This unique and innovative program is designed to give a “look ahead” to core senior leadership and give local leadership an opportunity to ensure all safety mechanisms are in place before high risk activities begin work. The WORM is generated by the PWO’s/ROICC’s and forwarded to OPS/IPT/Safety Office the week prior to high risk activities.

Measuring Performance

Locations

ESAMS

Completion Mishap Near Miss

# of Stressors In‐House Contractor NAVFAC SE Core 56% N/A N/A N/A N/A 0 0 Albany 100% N/A N/A N/A 0 0 4 Barksdale 100% N/A N/A N/A 0 1 0 Beaufort 96% N/A N/A N/A 1.2 0 8 Charleston 99% N/A N/A N/A 0 0 1 Corpus Christi 90% 76% 140 1.8 0 1 0 Fort Worth 99% 97% 43 0.9 0.7 0 2 Gulfport 98% 94% 53 2 0.5 3 1

GTMO 96% 100% 14 0 0.1 0 2

Jacksonville (PWD) 92% 100% 13 0 0 2 1 Key West 90% 87% 303 1.8 0 0 1 Kings Bay 99% 94% 9 0 0.8 3 2 Kingsville 92% 92% 82 0 0.6 0 0 Mayport 91% 100% 10 0 0.5 1 11 Meridian 98% 98% 93 8.4 6.5 1 1 New Orleans 97% 100% 70 2.5 0.8 1 1 Orlando 100% N/A N/A N/A 3.2 0 0 Panama City 99% 99% 75 4 0 1 0 Pensacola 95% 98% 108 5.9 0.5 6 14 Shaw 85% N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 Whiting 100% N/A N/A 2.8 0.7 0 0

FEC AVG 94% 95% 1013 2.2 0.8 20 49

90% or greater 95% or greater 1.0 or less 1.0 or less Zero

80% ‐ 89% 90% ‐ 94% 1.1 ‐ 1.9 1.1 ‐ 2.9

79% or less 89% or less 2.0 or greater 3.0 or greater 1 or greater

Trending Trending Trending Trending

Medical Surveillance DART Rate

NAVFAC SE Safety Metrics

MonthlyYear To Date Report for: July‐12

Individual Site Consolidated to FEC Wide

Site Safety Metrics

• Incorporates six areas of safety management

• Identifies trends over the past six months

• Recognizes administrative hurdles in safety management

FEC Wide Metrics

• Reviewed and discussed by CO/XO/OPS at each MRB

• Allows sites to see where they “rank” with other PWDs/ROICCs

• Utilizes existing data sources; minimal effort expensed

0.61

0.7

0.51

0.37

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13

D A

R T

R at e

NAVAC SE Contractor DART Rate Trend

SE Sub Contractor Safety Provision

Since OCT 2010, NAVFAC SE construction and service contracts have included provisions in the specifications that all subcontractors must meet:

Experience Modifier Rate not greater than 1.1 and DART rate not greater than 3.0.

1) Overwhelming positive feedback from contractors.

2) No discernable price impact in the bids.

47% Reduction

0.5

1.5

2.5

FY11 FY12 FY13

1.9

1.7 1.7

1.57

1.37

1.12

2.01

1.66

0.68

D A

R T

R at e NAVAC SE In-House DART Rate Trend

Gen Industry

NAVFAC In-House

SE In-House

NAVFAC SE Operational Spectrum

ORM

CONSTRUCTION

MILCON

ENERGY

MAJOR MAINTENACE

MAJOR REPAIR/RENOVATION

IN-HOUSE WORK FORCE

WEIGHT HANDLING EQUIPMENT

FSC BOS CONTRACTS

FACILITY SERVICES

FACILITY MAINT. SPT

Near Miss Reporting Program

• Near-miss reporting is anchored as one of the top safety measurement indicators for NAVFAC safety.

• Encourage and promote near-miss reporting from our contracting partners.

– Positive recognition letters from command suite

– Acknowledgement of the contractor’s safety program always improving

– Clearly demonstrates leadership’s active role in mishap prevention

Example of Near Miss Lessons Learned

Improve KTR Safety Interest/Performance

• We have increased training and awareness in how to create and present our contracting partners with NAVFAC’s STAR (Safety Through Awards & Recognition) letter.

NAVFAC Private/Public Safety Portal

•The NAVFAC HQ public safety portal has up-to-date information, lessons learned, and other safety materials that will allow all employees to have immediate access to any and all safety documents.

•Public has access to contractor safety documents, such as the EM-385 online training course. This includes Power Point presentations and exams.

Project Specific Information for Projects P100/P099

12/3/2013

Project Specifics - Site

Site Overview

•Environmental Constraints –Tidal and non-Tidal wetlands throughout site –Extensive clearing required –In-water work restrictions and wetland filling restrictions

•Site Constraints –Extensive fill required

• Building FFEs raised approximately 8 feet from existing –Minimum number of parking spaces must be maintained –Access restrictions

• Old Tom Road load limits

• Periodic closure of access

• Barges for in-water work

•Access –Must maintain access to existing buildings and piers for 24/7 operations as well as life safety

Project Specifics – TSB-2

TSB-2 Overview

•TSB-2 also known as Building 2701 •Approximately 95,000 square feet

–11,000 high bay training area –Overhead crane –Two elevators –Warehouse –Blast hardened –Security requirements –Simulator install begins October 1, 2016 –Support Systems Complex

Project Specifics – SAEP

Secure Area Entry Point (SAEP)

•SAEP also known as Building 2626 •Approximately 8,300 square feet

–Personnel screening areas –Security equipment –Visitor/Waiting area –Toilet –Electrical/Mechanical equipment –Full-height turnstiles –Metal detectors –X-ray machines

Project Specifics – BPE

Berthing Pier Extension (BPE)

•35 feet wide by 300 feet long •Location is currently occupied by a finger pier

–Debris from previous pier that was destroyed by Hurricane Andrew is still in the vicinity

• Multiple surveys completed of channel bottom, including bathymetric and sub-bottom profile, to locate existing debris

–Existing finger pier must be demolished •Pier construction includes utilities

–Relocation of existing substation –Construction of new substations –Extension of SSC utilities to BPE, North Pier and South Pier

•Shore Power Booms •Defensive Fighting Positions

Project Specifics – TSB-2A

TSB-2A Overview

•TSB-2A also known as Building 2711 •Approximately 105,000 square feet

–10,000 square foot cafeteria –Auditorium –One elevator –Repair shop –Blast hardened

Project Specifics – TSB-1

TSB-1 Overview

•TSB-1 also known as Building 2314 •Existing building

–Renovations throughout building –Quarterdeck is current site access point

•Work cannot start until TSB-2A is completed –Phased to allow maximum access to contractor –Operations will be ongoing throughout construction

DDESB – Explosives Safety

•Site is located within explosives safety arc –Project is currently under review by Department of Defense Explosives Safety Board (DDESB)

–Buildings are all blast hardened and without windows –Alterations to structural design for any reason could result in schedule delays due to requirements for review by DDESB

• This includes utility penetrations through walls

•Approval from DDESB must be received prior to contract award –Anticipated approval timeline is March 2014

Construction Schedule

•Critical Need-by dates for TSB-2 and BPE •Site construction needs to be finished in FY18 •Multiple FY projects with funding provided from different years •Environmental constraints on dates that work can be performed •Must maintain 24/7 operations and access •Phasing drawings provided to highlight key sequencing operations for access, utilities, security etc.

Security

•Site includes extensive security coordination –Access to secure perimeter is limited to US citizens and contractors must be escorted throughout site

–Contractor will be required to relocate fencing as shown on drawings to establish and maintain the secure perimeter throughout construction

–Separate CLINs for cameras and IDS to be installed by contractor –SPAWAR oversight of installation, configuration and testing

P-100/P-099 Nuclear Power Training Facilities Joint Base Charleston, South Carolina

Draft Solicitation N69450-14-R-1756 Presented by:

Kendra McMahon, Contract Specialist

Solicitation N69450-14-R-1756

General Solicitation Information Solicitation Schedule Bid structure (base bid, FY funding, options, etc.)

Overview of Evaluation Factors Suggestions on Solicitation Submission Q&A session

NOTE: Draft Solicitation is subject to change

Overview of the Contract

General Description:

•P-100/P-099

•Renovation a multi-story training support building (TSB-1);

•Construction two new multi-story, blast hardened training operation and support buildings (TSB-2 and TSB-2A);

•Construction of a single story Secured Area Entry Point (SAEP) and

•Construction a pier extension of steel and concrete piles and slabs

Overview of the Contract

Firm-fixed Price Contract

Full and Open Competition

Design-Bid-Build

Draft RFP

• Comment period open until December 18

• Not a formal request for proposal

• All information is subject to change

Solicitation Schedule (Tentative)

Formal RFP issued December 19th

Site Visit at Joint Base Charleston January 7th

PPI’s to be submitted at least 15 days prior to closing date

Closing date scheduled for mid February

Bid Structure for P-100

CLIN 0001: P-100 Nuclear Power Operational Training Facility, Joint Base Charleston, SC less item 0002, 0003, 0004, and 0005

CLIN 0002: Option Item 1 – P-100- All pier work less mechanical and electrical utilities

CLIN 0003: Option Item 2 – P-100 All mechanical and electrical utilities on pier

CLIN 0004: Option Item 3 – P-100 Site improvements (irrigation and rainwater harvesting system, plantings other than seed and sod and plantings in bioswales, second site entrance ramp, cast-in-place entrance retaining structures in lieu of mechanically stable earth walls, and decorated brick edging)

CLIN 0005: Option Item 4 – P-100 TSB-2 upgraded doors and floor finishings

Bid Structure for P-099

CLIN 0006: Option Item 5 – P-099 Nuclear Power Operational Support Facility, Joint Base Charleston, SC less CLIN 0007, 0008 and 0009

CLIN 0007: Option Item 6 – P-099 IX-516 Survival Mooring System

CLIN 0008: Option Item 7 – P-099 TSB-2A upgraded doors and floor finishings

CLIN 0009: Option Item 8 – P-099 Demolition and removal of existing office trailers on the north side of the site

Bid Structure for Collateral Equipment

CLIN 0010: Option Item 9 – P-100 Security (Electronic Security System (ESS) and Intrusion Detection System (IDS) Equipment for Initial Outfitting of MILCON)

CLIN 0011: Option Item 10 – P-099 Security (ESS and IDS Equipment for Initial Outfitting of MILCON)

CLIN 0012: Planned Modification: P-100 FF&E

CLIN 0013: Planned Modification: P-099 FF&E

Bid Structure (cont.)

Options may be exercised within 365 days from date of contract award

Phasing identified in CLIN Structure (A, B, and C) represents phased delivery schedule. Description of Acquisition, Liquidated Damages and Phases Clause will be corrected to correlate with CLIN Structure.

• Phase A (TSB 2 from CLIN 0001 and all CLIN 0005 (if exercised)) – Completion Date: 763 calendar days from date of contract award

• Phase B (All CLIN 0002 and CLIN 0003 (if exercised)) – Completion Date: 913 calendar days from April 1, 2015

• Phase C (Remainder of CLIN 0001, all CLINs 0004 through 0011 (if exercised)) – Completion Date: 1400 calendar days from date of contract award

Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment (FF&E)

Each project has an Estimated FF&E Budget (CLIN 0012 & 0013) which will be issued as a planned modification

Offerors may propose a Handling and Administration Rate (HAR) for the FF&E not to exceed 5% for each project.

HAR should cover all administrative costs, overhead, bonding fees, administration of subcontracts, profit, and any other costs associated with and related to the coordination and processing of the procurement and installation of FF&E.

Best Value Determination will be conducted by the Designer of Record.

FF&E (cont.)

EXAMPLE:

Planned Modification: P-099 FF&E (see FF&E Note) •Estimated FF&E Budget for P-099: $7,640,000.00 •Handling and Administrative Rate (HAR) NTE 5% (1%)___$76,400____ •Total Estimated FF&E Amount for P-099 (Budget + HAR) __$7,716,400____

The Estimated FF&E Budget for each project is only an estimated amount. The contractor will be given the final budget amount for the FF&E package during the construction phase for the FF&E.

The proposed HAR % will be incorporated into the contract award and will not be adjusted regardless of fluctuations in the FF&E Budget.

Proposal Requirements

Volume I – Price Proposal Volume II – Non Cost/Price Factors

• Factor 1 – Experience

• Factor 2 – Technical Approach

• Factor 3 – Construction Schedule

• Factor 4 – Safety

• Factor 5 – Small Business Utilization

– 5.A. – Past Performance in Utilization of Small Business Concerns

– 5.B. – Small Business Participation

• Factor 6 – Past Performance

Keep proposals separate

Volume I – Price Proposal

•Provide one (1) original, one (1) copy and one electronic copy (CD format) of the solicitation submittal. Electronic copy does not have to include the total proposed project price.

• Include the following:

– Executed SF1442

– Bid Bond (SF-24)

– Ensure registration in SAM – to include Annual Reps and Certs; complete any reps/certs that vary from or not in SAM See FAR 52.204-8 and 52.209-7 (FAPIIS)

– Vets-100 Registration •Email Confirmation of submission •Brief statement stating that the offeror is not required to submit and why

Price Evaluation

The Government will evaluate price based on the total price.

Total price consists of the basic requirement, all option items, and FF&E line items.

Per FAR 52.219-4, Price Evaluation Preference for SBA Certified HUBZONE Small Business Concern

Volume II – Non Cost/Price Factors

Provide one original, five copies, and one electronic copy (CD) for Factors 1 – 6.

Entire proposal shall not exceed 100 pages in length (front side only) utilizing a minimum Arial Font of 11 with pages numbered.

Title page, table of contents, dividers and any pages specifically excluded under each factor do not count towards the total page count and should not be numbered.

Documentation for JV Agreements, partnerships, subcontractors or teaming arrangements does not count towards the page count.

Factor 1 – Experience

Use the Construction Experience Project Data Sheet to submit projects (not to exceed 2 pages) for General and Specialized Construction Experience – Attachment D

Two Types of Experience – General and Specialized

General Construction Experience

• 2 – 5 construction projects (new or renovation)

• completed by the prime

• similar size, scope, complexity

• $80M +

• 170,000 sq ft of work

• Completed in the last 7 years

General Construction Experience (cont.)

• 9 Significant features – relevant projects collectively must demonstrated experience in all of the significant features

•Subcontractor Experience not permitted on this item

• Joint Ventures (JV)

•JV must be prime on at least one of the relevant general experience projects

OR

•Each member of JV must be prime construction contractor on at least one relevant general experience project

Specialized Construction Experience

• 1 – 3 for each of the three Specialized Categories

•Pier/Wharf Facilities

• Industrial Support Facilities •Facility Security Outfitting

• Completed in the last 5 years

• Completed by the prime (either as a prime or sub)

OR

• Proposed Significant Subcontractor with signed teaming agreement or letter of commitment

• Similar size, scope, complexity to each specialty

• Minimum requirements in each specialty

Factor 2 – Technical Approach

Thickened Architectural Concrete Construction

• Constructing the exterior exposed concrete walls for the buildings to be relatively crack-free, smooth and consistent in appearance.

• Narrative limited to one page

In-water and Waterfront Construction

• BPE construction material delivery

• Access for material, equipment and personnel to the waterfront work areas

• Narrative limited to two pages

Factor 2 – Technical Approach

Support Systems Complex (SSC)

• Cleanliness established and maintained for the high purity water production system IAW Spec 01 46 00.00

• Quality Control Plan limited to two pages Site Security

• Concept plan to include

- phasing to maintain existing secure perimeter;

- establishing temporary and final perimeters;

- transitioning from existing security control station to new stations without loss of security throughout site; and

- minimizing contractor activities within the site security perimeter.

• Narrative shall be limited to three pages and

• May submit up to three 11 x 17 site plans

Factor 3 – Construction Schedule

Draft Construction Schedule showing key milestones identified in the Draft RFP

Network Analysis Schedule is NOT required

Submit schedule on up to three ledger size (11 x 17) sheets

Submit a narrative discussing transition plans – limited to two pages

Factor 4 - Safety

Submit EMR, OSHA DART Rate and Safety narrative for Calendar Years 2010, 2011, 2012

Ensure DART Rates are calculated

If Rate is Zero, state that it is Zero

Ensure safety plan includes evaluation of subcontractors

Factor 5 – Small Business

Two Subfactors:

• 5A Past Performance in Utilization of Small Business Concerns

• 5B Small Business Participation This overall factor is weighted equal to factors 1 - 4 5A Past Performance

• Ensure you address all elements (a – g) or explain why that element is not addressed.

• Use Attachment E, Small Business Past Performance for Small Businesses or Large Businesses with no prior SF294/ISR history

•Only required for prime - subcontractor history not required •Joint Ventures – address elements (a – f) for each entity

Factor 5 – Small Business (cont.)

5B Small Business Participation

• Small Business use Attachment G – Proposed Subcontracting Participation Breakdown

• Large Business use Attachment F – Small Business Contracting Plan

• FY 14 Targets provided in Attachment F and in the FY 14 – FY 18 Targets provided in the subfactor

• LBs will be evaluated based on FY14 targets; however minimum targets increase for each FY

• Joint Ventures – Identify % of work performed by each member and the size of each member

Factor 6 – Past Performance

Past performance is a separate non-cost/price factor and receives a confident assessment rating based on:

• Evaluation of recent efforts and relevancy to current project

• Determination of how well contractor performed on those recent/relevant contracts

Provide your CCASS Evaluation for each relevant project submitted in Factor 1

Use PPQ (Attachment H) if CCASS Evaluation is not available and submit with proposal

May address negative past performance (NTE 4 pages)

Best Value Tradeoff Evaluation

The relative order of importance of the non-cost/price evaluation factors and subfactors is the technical factors (Factors 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) and their respective subfactors are of equal importance to each other respectively and, when combined, are equal in importance to the past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment factor (Factor 6). When the proposal is evaluated as a whole, the technical factors and past performance/performance confidence assessment factor combined (i.e., the non-cost/price evaluation factors) are approximately equal to price.

Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors.

Suggestions on Solicitation Submissions

Read the solicitation carefully before responding and submit complete proposals.

• Understand the contract terms, not just the technical requirements Verify accuracy of SAM and VETS-100 registrations Make sure insurance information is up-to-date (EMR and

DART) for prime and all subs – submit that rate Sign and return all solicitation amendments Ask questions Do not provide company brochures Number proposal pages consecutively

Suggestions on Solicitation Submissions

Do not copy and paste from a prior proposal Clearly label and separate/tab each factor in your proposal Address every element within each factor Create a checklist Submit your “best offer” with your initial submission!